So far, this series has addressed what Red State legislatures have been doing to reduce green house gas (GHG) emissions. The verdict: progress is being made, at least as reflected in Red State legislation to promote energy efficiency and the expansion of renewables. This legislation may not be framed as part of the battle to combat climate change but ever-increasing energy efficiency and the expansion of renewables are five-star generals in the war against climate change (see Part I of this series for elaboration), so why quibble?
Note that many Republicans acknowledge the possibility of anthropogenic climate change, even though most aren't convinced beyond all doubt. That may be enough to elicit concern and wanting to do something about it, especially when there are other advantages to reducing GHG emissions, like reducing pollution, protecting the environment, and reducing the cost of doing business and buying stuff.
Having that niggling feeling that maybe human-caused climate change is really happening can be enough to get on all sorts of GHG emissions-reducing initiatives. Kinda like Pascal's wager: since God and hell might exist, I'll error on the side of virtue...just in case*. Yeah, one might unwilling to go all the way if one is not a true-blue believer (engage in self-flagellation or advocate for a huge carbon tax), but remember the "consensus" is only that anthropogenic climate change exists, not that it demands specific GDP-crushing measures.
Now we're going to look at Red States energy consumption and GHG emissions. First, look at this map of the Red and Blue states:
What stands out in this map is that Red States are less densely populated than Blue States. They're more rural with plenty of room for people to spread out. Since rural homes are bigger and traveling distances farther, it should come as no surprise that Red States consume more energy per capita than Blue States. This is a function of landscape and livelihood, not politics. If you're a farmer, you don't tootle around in a Prius - you drive a pick-up.
More stringent building codes will eventually bring down residential energy consumption in the Red States. GHG emissions should also go down, as most Red States are investing in natural gas infrastructure as part of the nation-wide shift away from coal-based electricity generation. As for those pick-up trucks, between hybrids and electrical vehicles, I'm betting the worst gas guzzlers will go the way of the dodo within a few decades.
*To keep skeptics in the Pascal's wager zone, don't try to shove God and hell down their throats, or tell them how stupid and misguided they are for not "believing" wholeheartedly in climate change. It doesn't help and may very well invite greater doubt.
Reference:
Matteo Muratori Rural Energy Use and the Challenges for Energy Conservation and Efficiency National Rural Development and Policy Center, Policy Brief 17, November 2013